Nope, Apple made it clear they tested Mac OS X on a touchscreen device. And it sucked. Rightly. Because Mac OS X is designed for one point of input at the size of one pixel (and because at the time, it was Panther, but that's secondary).

Doesn't stop them from making a completely new desktop touch OS.

What part of my statement do you have disagreement? I stated clearly that they have 2 different UI Paradigms and you say, ``Nope,...'' and reinforce my statement by reciting what Craig Federigi [former colleague of mine] stated during WWDC.

By my citing the 2 different UI paradigms I'm making it clear that Apple [like Craig cited] has deliberately split the two markets where the embedded space is a touch space and the Desktop/Laptop is a hybrid mouse/touchpad/glidepad space.

I'll be more clear: iOS is Apple's Consumption OS. Mac OS X is Apple's Production OS. Portions of iOS extended from OS X make it a partial production OS but never will it be that of OS X.

No one will be sitting in from of a 30" screen and typing on it. Nor will they ditch the keyboard for some large glide pad only where I can get a virtual keyboard and type on it ala Star Trek, all in a price point at today's prices or less.

This isn't Star Trek where everyone on the ship is just working in their assigned control panel or Johnny Neumonic where we have roll out keyboards with perfect sensor response interfaces that react instantly like a physical keyboard does.

What part of my statement do you have disagreement? I stated clearly that they have 2 different UI Paradigms and you say, ``Nope,...'' and reinforce my statement by reciting what Craig Federigi [former colleague of mine] stated during WWDC.

Your statement just implied that a multitouch desktop UI wouldn't be happening at all. Apple tested OS X with a touchscreen and found it lacking, but that doesn't stop a future OS from being multitouch and DESIGNED for desktop-level use.

Quote:

the rest of your post

I absolutely understand what you're saying and see where you're coming from.

But you're using current tech to make these statements. And I agree with you there.

The visible file system is a design choice...much like changing the look of the scrollbars.

Merging the 2 OS'es would basically involve merging almost all the code below the UI. They might even try merging the APIs (which are already very similar). This would mean that the same 3rd Party codebase would function across Mac, iPad, iPhone with only the UI needing to be changed.

This would be a dramatic improvement for both devs and customers.

The merge WILL happen, as long as Apple is technically capable of actually doing it. The only remaining question is when will they start.

That merge already has happened but that's irrelevant. What the article says is merging the complete OS. Even the first iOS used the exact same kernel as OS X if what Jobs claimed was true. Most of the code is already the same and the only changes needed are UI elements when parting between iOS and OS X these days.

But merging the entire OS is something else, otherwise why make an article of something that already is in place right now?

It would mean merging the entire UI, merging how we use the OS (is it gonna be touch based or mouse based or somehow both?), also limiting a lot of control required in a desktop OS for developers.

Yes Apple borrowed from iOS but example they could have added versioning and resume features without removing the Save As... item from the file menu. Why they decided to do so? Just because of the way iOS apps work. Instant On.

Whatever you were working on reappears after closing. Thats fine and dandy but I want to be able to save a file manually for sharing or anything else. I want control.

Also, hate the command left click in a windows title bar no longer shows that document or folders path. Launchpad I can live without. Mission control SHOULD be separate, its a memory hog now. I don't want to be forced to use spaces or dashboard. If I only want to use expose, i should be allowed to do so. Aesthetically, Snow Leopard looked better. The login screen/window, the aqua buttons, ical, address book etc...

Duplicate functions as "save as". It's exactly the same thing. Command+left click shows the path on title bar, as was in SL.

Mission Control is not a memory hog because it's an app which only launches when you launch it and then shuts down. You are not forced to use spaces unless you use full screen apps, so that part is exactly the same as SL.

I am actually starting to get a bit worried about the direction Apple is going, even though I am a die hard 27 year user. I remember the days when the documents were not able to be viewed on PC's and vice versa. I remember the days when PC's could do things we couldn't do on the mac and vice versa. Then I saw things becoming more compatible, and the macs more and more powerful. Now (just look at Snow Leopard) the default settings are contrary to what many of us like. Many of our legacy apps are not useable (stupid rosetta), and certain favorite bits and pieces are missing, and or dumbed down. I just read an article where Mac Snow Leopard server was not nearly as powerful, and useable as Leopard server was.

I just hope we are not going the way of the old 68030 chips, where the walled garden was even higher than now. Personally, I would hate to see every single app, every single video, audio, and audiobook HAVE to come through the Apple Store. I love the security and safety, but worry about the "Big Brother" control on everything.

Apple is looking to merge its iOS and Mac OS X operating systems into one unified platform for applications and cloud services as soon as next year starting with the MacBook Air, one Wall Street analyst believes. Peter Misek with Jefferies & Co. said in a note to investors

When I want to know what next big thing will happen in technology, the first person I think to ask is a "Wall Street analyst" . . . someone like Kathy Huberty perhaps? . . . NO!

2012 is too early, merging means a new unified iOS/OSX released just one year after OS X 10.7.

We're looking more at the end of 2013 with iOS/OSX unified running on ARM 64bit or Intel on the higher-end. This merging thing has to be done right or it's going to alienate users of both platforms.

There's definitely going to be some ARM-based MacBook Airs being thoroughly tested with 10.7 builds for ARM. These *could* come out towards the end of 2012 but I think it is unlikely. I think Apple is going to give Intel-OSX a solid unfettered run in 2012 and are gearing up for the "next big transition to ARM and unified iOS/OSX" in 2013.

I am actually starting to get a bit worried about the direction Apple is going, even though I am a die hard 27 year user. I remember the days when the documents were not able to be viewed on PC's and vice versa. I remember the days when PC's could do things we couldn't do on the mac and vice versa. Then I saw things becoming more compatible, and the macs more and more powerful. Now (just look at Snow Leopard) the default settings are contrary to what many of us like. Many of our legacy apps are not useable (stupid rosetta), and certain favorite bits and pieces are missing, and or dumbed down. I just read an article where Mac Snow Leopard server was not nearly as powerful, and useable as Leopard server was.

I just hope we are not going the way of the old 68030 chips, where the walled garden was even higher than now. Personally, I would hate to see every single app, every single video, audio, and audiobook HAVE to come through the Apple Store. I love the security and safety, but worry about the "Big Brother" control on everything.

Honestly, I'll only worry the day I can't run reasonably run Windows in VMWare Fusion or Parallels, or if major Mac apps keep crashing on OS X.

There are some weird things about Lion but overall the important bits are there. Apple is never going to please the die-hard, long-term Mac users. The focus is on iPhone and iPad driving everything, and the Mac team trying to "keep up". Pros and people that need Rosetta will be sticking to Snow Leopard for at least the whole of this year. For the rest of us, Lion is the wave to ride. I like that I'm learning new Mac things in a way.

Again, how many people need x86 to run VMWare (me, I'm Parallels) effectively? And how many of them (corp types), would probably have a better overall TCO if it was remotely virtualized (Citrix Receiver)?

I really do think the age of 'fat client' is driving to a sudden death with the 'app centric' personal devices.

if you can kill a DVD drive in 2011, maybe the x86 chip as _THE_ CPU in 2013 (apple and/or a 3rd party can always sell you a coprocessor that connected via a ThunderBolt interface a nice 2ghz, 2gbRam unit... the size of a wall wart, $149 no Win7License SheevaPlugPC)! Face it. For 6.9Billion people, WinTel isn't a requirement, it's just the most common way to deliver a text entry/ internet surfing system.

I agree, I was merely stating the obvious (I thought) that for me, this could be the last year a MBA can run VM so I better grab one. I wasn't discussing the larger issue or merits of supporting VMs in general.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

The idea of an ARM laptop running OS-X is interesting has it could results in a very low cost and low power unit that could run OS-X and iOS apps (but not windows). Lets say 64 gigs SSD, 2MB ram, touch screen. If would be a very entry level unit has ARM are nowhere near intel chips in performances.

If they could come up with a 499$ 7" or 10" laptop this would address a market segment Apple cant reach ATM. A Macbook mini?

My thought here is that Apple will at some time in the future expand the iOS device line up. It would be possible to see an iOS device with some sort of keyboard. However I don't think Apple would try to market it as a laptop top or even a Mac. The problem would be consumer confusion, if they clearly market such a micro laptop as an iOS device there would be little confusion. Frankly though hitting the right price point would be difficult.

One concept that has run through my mind very often is an iPad with a slide out keyboard. This could be a handy arrangement but it is not cheap nor is it optimal for bulk. Even something like the Touch could benefit from a slide out keyboard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by herbapou

The idea of an ARM laptop running OS-X is interesting has it could results in a very low cost and low power unit that could run OS-X and iOS apps (but not windows). Lets say 64 gigs SSD, 2MB ram, touch screen. If would be a very entry level unit has ARM are nowhere near intel chips in performances.

We already have a good idea how well ARM runs on an iPad. It wouldn't take much to get acceptable performance out of an iOS clam shell device. Note also that Apple could easily go to quad core to manage some of those performance expectations.

Quote:

If they could come up with a 499$ 7" or 10" laptop this would address a market segment Apple cant reach ATM. A Macbook mini?

I suspect that Apples price on the iPad kinda indicates that hitting the $499 range with a clam shell would be difficult today. Note that the price on hardware would drop significantly over time so who knows. The trick or difficult part for Apple would be to come up with a mechanical design where the keyboard is a secondary input device. There is little point in making another laptop as traditional laptop usage puts the screen to far away for touch usage. So they need a different concept.

I've always loved custom hardware (I've been an SGI user for many years, and I felt it really sad when their colorful machines failed in the market), but the reality of the market nowadays is this: If you want to succeed in the hardware market, use the same components that most people use in the world. If you go custom, you go towards your own, "customized" total failure of your business.

And, of course, not to mention the nightmare of another binary migration of executables

The only reason I'd like of this move is because it's annoying the Intel interest in graphics and their war against NVIDIA. If there was justice in the market, Intel deserves failure just because of the way they've imposed their low quality integrated GPUs in current hardware.

But, even considering how disgusting are Intel GPUs, please don't do another CPU migration

Not likely unless ARM is 64bit by then. All but the cheapest stock models of the macbook air currently ship with 4GB of RAM. I don't see them being stuck at that amount until 2016, nor do I see Apple releasing and encouraging the continued development of 32-bit versions of software after the whole system just transitioned to 64-bits last month.

I don't see an Arm proc in the macbook air's future especially after the latest round of performance boosts by the Quad Core i7 & i5. But what I do suspect will happen is an intel version of iOS will come along maybe replacing dashboard in the MacOS giving a user a quick way to transition from a traditional mac notebook to an on the go tablet with access to all the same software and files just a different UI.

Thanks for the heads up. I thought CMD + left click triggered a menu that displayed previous versions of the document vs the path. I'll have double check on that, maybe its a preference somewhere. At least that was the case when I briefly tried Lion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tails

Duplicate functions as "save as". It's exactly the same thing. Command+left click shows the path on title bar, as was in SL.

Mission Control is not a memory hog because it's an app which only launches when you launch it and then shuts down. You are not forced to use spaces unless you use full screen apps, so that part is exactly the same as SL.

Perhaps ARM will be used as co-processor of sorts. For example in an iOS mode where you don't want to completely boot to OS X. That could be interesting.

If Apple were to go all ARM I don't think it would be an island. They could use Intel for the Mac Pro, and MacBook Pro. While the Air, Mini and iMac get the ARM treatment. There's also rumors of a Windows ARM version so that could help with users that still "need" Windows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eswinson

I don't see an Arm proc in the macbook air's future especially after the latest round of performance boosts by the Quad Core i7 & i5. But what I do suspect will happen is an intel version of iOS will come along maybe replacing dashboard in the MacOS giving a user a quick way to transition from a traditional mac notebook to an on the go tablet with access to all the same software and files just a different UI.

I think the whole idea behind it - is to be able to run same Mac applications on both platforms that exist today - OS X and iOS.
I totally see myself having, let's say, future 16-core iPhone. It needs no more than 2 cores to run in the phone mode. But when I came home and plugged it into a dock connected to a 27" monitor and external power supply (so it can use all it's processing cores), I will be able run let's say Final Draft, desk top versions of Safari, iTunes and Photo Shop.
Dock can be shaped as laptop with 13"screen, full keyboard and possibility to use my iPhone as a touch pad.
And I do believe that progress is moving in direction of having computer in your jeans pocket.

Seriously, how can some people make silly predictions like this and get coverage by sites such as this one. The speculations are silly, as previous people have pointed out, the commitment apple has to the Intel platform is obvious. A move to an Arm platform would hit the market like a return to PPC architecture. Apple couldn't be that stupid.

And besides, his prediction of a merged operating system, what does he think iOS is ? It's OS X by the way, the same basic kernel and other requirements come the same code core as OS X.

Most people know this so my point is no so much the pronouncement of ignorant twerps, rather that this guy got coverage at all. Please scrutinize your articles a bit better please, this is a great site and its a pity that time is given to such rubbish.

))))))) "Analysts" !!! Could you please stop these stupid predictions. Please open your mouth when you know about something. Guys (analysts) apparently you even don't know what are computers when we hear this shallow, stupid predictions from you. If they merge the two OS how could we developers develop apps? On a lightweight OS like iOS? How could people use specific programs which are used in different majors and they can not be run on a closed lightweight OS like iOS? There are many many applications that simply does not fit in iOS. Do you think that Apple simply kills all of the programing languages on OS X like Java, Ruby, Python?? Do you know how many developers are working on OS X and not using Obj-C ??? Do you know what does it mean having a platform on which you can develop softwares?? It means an open platform where you can interact with every corner of your OS/App/Files... having console etc. etc. Is it possible on a closed non-productive platform like iOS?? Do you know what are the uses of OS X and iOS. iOS is a consuming platform and OS X is a productive platform. They ship nearly 3.5 million Macs every quarter. Do you seriously think that everybody gives 2000$ 3000$ to buy a Mac running iOS ??? ))))